From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752155AbZHZRSf (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Aug 2009 13:18:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751449AbZHZRSf (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Aug 2009 13:18:35 -0400 Received: from outbound-mail-113.bluehost.com ([69.89.24.3]:46888 "HELO outbound-mail-113.bluehost.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751268AbZHZRSe (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Aug 2009 13:18:34 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=virtuousgeek.org; h=Received:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:X-Mailer:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Identified-User; b=FCbNSzl3PzC5WjNGzl83OkjcxJHlYOK2BHsnptMcpGG6RbgEFWC5ePymNnr1DyG18sNrQ5kePZTLACg6SpPW/e7sroZMZFCoXAGOXbuwiIcFoa1QetQdXNjA93cMPKYY; Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 10:18:25 -0700 From: Jesse Barnes To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Dave Airlie , Zhenyu Wang , Eric Anholt , mailing54 , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Dave Airlie , dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Ma Ling , "Zhao, Yakui" Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.31-rc7 Message-ID: <20090826101825.455d280e@jbarnes-g45> In-Reply-To: References: <4A941E8B.8080902@plzk.org> <4A94599F.9020508@plzk.org> <1251239637.26348.20.camel@gaiman.anholt.net> <20090826015127.GA1402@zhen-devel.sh.intel.com> <21d7e9970908252047g6db2fb2aj69280efa5eebe681@mail.gmail.com> <21d7e9970908252158q30d7e4fay587458b79cd0c36d@mail.gmail.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.2 (GTK+ 2.17.5; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Identified-User: {10642:box514.bluehost.com:virtuous:virtuousgeek.org} {sentby:smtp auth 75.111.28.251 authed with jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org} Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 26 Aug 2009 10:12:14 -0700 (PDT) Linus Torvalds wrote: > In all three cases the end result is "no EDID", but regardless of > that, the correct action is basically _never_ to say "ok, I'll just > assume that the display is on connector XYZ regardless of what the > state of the graphics chip is". Yeah, that's normal. Most builtin panels don't have EDIDs. Failures on attached monitors are potentially more serious. > > so yes I think do better at failing is what is needed, its still > > failing but its more user friendly fail. > > Yes. If something fails ("oops, I can't seem EDID for any > connector"), I wish KMS would fail way better than just default to > some crazy setup. The failure mode should be to at least drive > whatever the BIOS enabled. Right, we need to improve our detection heuristics. We've recently added some to catch non-existent LVDS displays, but currently don't have any for VGA. Using the current configuration as a guide is a reasonable addition... -- Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center